Finer Measurements Don't Cause Harsher Regulation

I have been working in the water environmental field since 1982. As detection limits improved so did the statistics that indicated problems we weren't previously aware of. Along with that swing in the pendulum the regulatory agencies began using wether or not something was detected and how many times. The goal was to justify an intense study to see if it caused any detectable or attributable change from no impact at all. In truth any development of any kind that is different from what occurs as background will have some adjacent impact or you haven't search well enough. To say that impact of any kind is denied, stops all development amd is irrational as man is a natural inhabitant.

I have been on a private well water for over 15-yrs now (on the Gulf coast), so I haven't seen a water bill in all that time.

Prior to this, I lived on the east coast of Florida, and I distinctly recall having been flabbergasted at the "Disclaimer" on the backside of our bills.

The municipal water was NOT guaranteed even to be fit for continued consumption!

The things we take for granted . . . . . . . . . .

As a retired person from the water resource, monitoring, and treatment industry, I enjoyed the article. Lower detection limits have allowed for better monitoring and the setting of limits. The lower and better detection limits have allowed labs to discover other things we may have to be concerned about in our drinking water. Endocrine disruptors seem to be the buzz words for the past decade or so. As we get better in the detection of some of these extra things showing up on lab scans, I do believe we will set new limits and goals for both testing and toxicology reports. These things can vary from the drugs we take, pesticides and herbicides, organic fuel products, etc. There is mounting evidence of Bisphenol A (BPA) as contributing to many maladies. BPA is the white liner in most tinned foods, found on baby bottles, and many other close contact uses. BPA is banned in some items in Canada and there is even an international symposium on BPA this week in Montreal to discuss limits and banning of it for many close contact uses. BPA causes male off spring have smaller penises, lower sperm count, etc. Ditto health problems exist for many of these disruptors.

The detection of things like caffeine are possible and give an indication of the problems one may have with a septic tank. Many medicines survive the sewage processes applied. Birth control pills, and ibuprofen ( noted to be excreted at a rate of 60% of the dose taken) are just a couple of examples. Many of these things can cause some issues with human or aquatic life. I see these issues as more environmental than drinking water specific but it certainly should be applied to our drinking water.

The lower detection limits may serve as an indicator of other issues with a particular water or aquifer. The problem with a small system is that most users don't sample for anything let alone those that are regulated. Regulated systems are defined and operators are obligated to test and to the limits in the regulation. We have yet to add many of the new endocrine disruptors to the list. I fear for private home owners and their capability to test.